Joe Shaw
-
Posts
9,270 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Joe Shaw
-
-
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>One of Mr. Shaw's early comeuppances.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> You forgot to insert "and extremely rare" after "early". No problem, I know you've been under a lot of strain lately. Eathan is a sad case under any circumstance, but the torture he's been subjected to by PDHX is truly horrific ... I understand he's been made to read ALL of Germanboys posts.
Joe
-
I knew it, I just knew it, the minute I saw that stupid quote I knew that Eathan/PDHX would be sitting up, preening himself and basking in the glory of the fact that someone ... anyone (no offense Elija) would have remembered his moment in the sun. I almost posted a warning not to encourage him, but decided to wait and hope for the best. Futile hope, he sniffs out references that even tangentially deal with him like a ferret sniffing out a dead prarie dog. Hmmmm, ferrets eat prarie dogs ... wonder how they would like ... HAMSTER! Bwahahahaha!
Joe
-
Excellent work BTS, you guys continue to amaze and delight.
Quick Question, would someone repost the instructions for converting PBEM games ... I've got a couple of 1.04 games going that I might as well convert. And, being elderly as I am I've clean forgotten how
Joe
-
Dr. Brian, just as a note for future reference, please preface any scenario specific comments with SPOILER so that those who haven't played the scenario can play it blind. That's something that we all kind of agreed on but obviously you couldn't be expected to know.
For example:
SPOILER
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
I assume that you have the canned version of Ham and Jam. Perhaps you noticed something else awry with it? The bloody thing takes place in the DAYTIME!
The designer has since fixed that issue and the new scenario is available on one or more of the sites. Finally remember that scenario designers don't necessarily follow the historical path slavishly, they are under some obligation to make the scenario competitive as well.You might go back to your original post and drop in that SPOILER tag for others. Just click on "edit" and you can make any changes you care to make.
Isn't it a great game!
Joe
-
Hi guys, thanks for the replies, at least I know it isn't just me. As for zipping, I have been doing that on occassion. It's just one extra step that I'd like to avoid if possible and since the text files seem to work "most" of the time I was hoping someone had a foolproof solution. But as they say "It's impossible to make anything foolproof because fools are so ingenious."
I will check out WinZip 8.0, CDIC, sounds like it may simplify the issue a bit.
In any case, I've yet to have a game blow up completely as would happen on occassion in the Beta demo so that's good.
Joe
-
Now that we've had more extensive experience using PBEM, I thought I'd ask the group about problems I'm encountering with emailed turns. It's not something that can't be worked around but I'd like to reduce the problems if possible.
I'm using a PC with Netscape as my email client since Outlooks scares me lately
1. With some opponents, my emails to or from them have the turn embedded within the body of the email. Sometimes we are able to salvage it by saving the entire email as the turn. Sometimes even that doesn't work. Sometimes they can cut and paste the relevant portion, sometimes not.
2. With some opponents, the email they send to me shows up without an attachment, but they tell me their "sent" copy shows the attachment.
I'm thinking it could be one of a couple of things, or maybe even both. It may be a problem with Netscape vs. Outlook or the way my Netscape is configured. The second issue might have to do with my ISP. Any suggestions would be appreciated. Also have others seen the same things?
Joe
-
I'm in the midst of a PBEM with Mark Ezra in which a M8 GMC was misreported to me as a normal Stuart. I discovered my mistake, eventually killed the silly thing and moved on. Now, some turns later, I see another "Stuart" and do I think "Golly, that might be another M8 GMC instead of a Stuart."? NO, I think, "Golly, that's a Stuart, I can kill a Stuart and don't have to worry because he only has a crummy 37mm." I'm constantly amazed at how well the misreporting feature works, not just as a visual gimmick, but at a subconcious level. The FOW is tremendous.
Joe
-
Stodge, your best bet for a response from BTS is not on this board but via email directly to them. They are quite good about responding to emails.
Joe
-
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Good to see the Borg is back on duty.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Hmmm, yes but note that it's now just "Assimilated", used to be "You Have Been Assimilated". I tell you it wasn't like that in the OLD Borg.
Joe
-
A good point and certainly one that I've noticed. On the flip side, however, there were certainly situations in which one side or the other went "hell for leather" for a particular spot and casualties be damned. One possible solution might be for BTS to allow QB meeting engagements to have "fake" VL flags as are allowed in the full scenarios. That way neither side would know for sure which VL's were "real" and more reasonable tactics might result. It could be included, I suppose, as another option on the QB screen. Obviously I'm no programmer and wouldn't dream of suggesting that I know what can and can't be done. It's not a big deal to me, you play with what you have and do the best you can. Sometimes the QB's fall in your favor, sometimes not.
Joe
-
AND you need to be careful. The game has reported this vehicle as a Stuart. Making tactical decisions based upon THAT assumption can be hazardous to the health of your units. Damned thing held me up for turns and killed three of my vehicles before I finally nailed it. And all the time Mark Ezra was chortling when I kept cursing his "Stuart" that was killing StuGs and AC's.
Joe
-
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Suffice to say it involves Guinea Pigs and very little Vaseline... Nuff said.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> And Mormon Wives, don't forget the Mormon Wives.
Joe
-
Yep, I had one that I ran up behind a ridgeline, popped out on the side of some trees and had a flank shot at a Panther AND a Tiger at about 150 meters. Took them both out on the same turn. And they were both moving. Neat little tank.
Joe
-
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Joe Squaw, do you think that 7 of 9 is blonde enough?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> She has hair? I never noticed.
Joe
-
Six OF Nine, I regret to inform you, is NOT the same as "69". Now Seven of Nine 69 ... Opps, are we venturing into Cesspool territory again?
Joe
-
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>You mean Six of Nine?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> You've clearly spent too much time posting to that Cesspool Peng thread there pal. It's Seven of Nine.
Joe
-
Thanks guys, not only did you provide a game that was great out of the box, but you continue to provide improvments and fixing issues brought up by your consumers. Excellent work.
Joe
-
I, and others, emailed the editor and he very kindly came on the board to explain his rationale. He also kindly responded to my email. For that I applaud him.
He's WRONG of course
Witness the PILE of awards you see every time you come to this board. That review is the exception that proves the rule. And the rule is that CM is one of the most honored and well received games ever.Joe
-
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Gods, no, not Mormon Wives...I recently hit the one where you posted three in a row and I think I've gone sterile...<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I'm misunderstood on the whole issue, I don't enjoy posting those photos, hell I have to look them up. But I do it to stop the tyranny of Professor Doktor Hamster X. So far the "wives" photos seem to be the only weakness he has. If Eathan remains a captive the hamsters will be playing all his games. Remember, "A Captive Eathan is Another Losing Game".
Joe
-
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Don't listen to Joe.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Thank you for noticing ... it's all I've ever really asked
Tread lightly Fionn, I have many more MORMON WIFE photos! Bwahahahahah!
Joe
-
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>The victory location should NOT be arbitrary. In every one of my designed scenarios I've made the VL some strategic spot ...<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I agree, in most of the designed scenarios there's some rhyme or reason to the location, but in a sense it's STILL arbitrary. For example, let's say you've decided that Hill 407 is a VL, so you place a flag there. But in reality your opponent could be surrounding the hill while you have one crummy squad up there. So in that sense, it's still arbitrary in that you have picked one SPOT on that hill. Don't get me wrong, I really don't have a problem with this, it's been part of game design for as long as I can remember, I'm just pointing it out.
Joe
-
I'd like to make a distinction here as well. While most of the posts are specifically game or history related, there are a few that are ... not related to much of anything. The "PENG Challenge" and "Hamster" threads are a good example. In those threads, a number of us are just having fun with gratuitous taunts and various silly stuff. Hopefully everyone recognizes those posts for what they are and understands that my calling Goat Sucker (a.k.a. Chupacabra) a flaming idiot with the intellegence of a sponge is simply part of the fun ... it's also true but that's another story.
Unfortunately even those posts can get out of hand. I was called to task, rightly so, for straying over the edge recently. The point (always assuming that I have one other than the one that occupies the top of my head) is that I WAS called to task and I apologized. From what I've seen, this board is usually quite civil and informative and even, at times, funny. I think that the current system works quite well. As Andreas would say however, YMMV.
Joe
-
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Why exactly a house falling down makes a larger explosion than whatever caused it to fall down in the first place is a question that many have asked, but, AFAIK, there has not been an answer.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Jeff IIRC, Matt answered that question at one point by saying that BTS chose that "nuke" effect for lack of something better to represent the destruction of the house. It certainly got my attention when my 81mm mortar caused a house to do that though
Joe
-
I've recently had a series of games in which the last few turns revolved around the "VL scramble". While I agree in general that this is a rather "gamey" aspect, I can usually rationalize it. As others have pointed out, it was not at all unusual for a superior officer to state "You've got take Hill 409 by 1400 hours or I'll find someone who can." And obviously the actual location of the VL is fairly abritrary in most cases. Since you have to "take the town" the location of the "the town" has to be specified somehow and VLs are about the only way to do it.
I have a question and a suggestion.
Question: It's two turns from the end of the game, there are three VL's shown as neutral. What do you do? Granted it's a bit gamey to suddenly pull a Rifle Team out of the line and have them dash to an arbitrary spot on the map. Especially since they might not survive for more than a turn or two. But this is a game with "victory" determined by who holds the VL's. Do you play "realistically" or do you play to win? In all likelihood I'd go for the win, but I wouldn't like it much. I also like the SMG approach BTW, it tends to discourage such things. What are the opinions of the group?
Suggestion: For you scenario designers out there. Perhaps you might consider using MORE VL's that are worth less. For example, if the goal is to "take the town", put a LOT of lower value VL's throughout the town, therefore the person who controlled most of them would control most of the town. Since I haven't played with scenario design that much I'm not certain there aren't problems with this approach, but it's a thought.
Joe
OT: Why the Germans are unhappy...
in Combat Mission Archive #2 (2000)
Posted
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>This could be a good reason why German people have got a reputation for being humourless and grumpy.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> And what would be a good reason for the well known Scottish attibutes of being carefree, spendthrift and fun loving? The lovely weather perhaps?
Joe